E
Edward Dolan
Guest
"Hadron Quark" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Peter Clinch <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Hadron Quark wrote:
>>
>>> Who said anything about *whether* you should wear a helmet? I already
>>> said I dont. This discussion is about whether a helmet provides
>>> protection.
>>
>> I've already quoted a rather relevant piece but you seem to have
>> ignored it so here it is again:
>>
>> "the very eminent QC under whose instruction I was privileged to work,
>> tried repeatedly to persuade the equally eminent neurosurgeons acting
>> for either side, and the technical expert, to state that one must be
>> safer wearing a helmet than without. All three refused to so do,
>> stating that they had seen severe brain damage and fatal injury both
>> with and without cycle helmets being worn. In their view, the
>> performance of cycle helmets is much too complex a subject for such a
>> sweeping claim to be made."
>>
>> That from Brian Walker, boss of Head Protection Evaluation, who are
>> responsible for testing cycle helmets conform to the relevant
>> standards in the UK.
>
> Did you read it? How do you equate that rather fluffy statement with
> whether a helment provides a degree of protection or not?
>
>>
>>> You seem to be unable to extrapolate any siutation : its a strange logic
>>> you have. You are either infallible or have never ridden in poor weather
>>> in fast moving commuting traffic where all sorts of situations rears
>>> their
>>> ugly head.
>>
>> On the contrary, I (along with millions of others) do it regularly,
>> and do it safely as well. I can dream up loads of situations where
>> I'd end up dead or injured, but that doesn't prove anything. OTOH,
>
> ??? eh ???? Of course it doesnt : but its you who mentioned it. So why?
> To deflect the thread again thats why.
>
>> the way that millions cycle safely and don't produce worse rates of
>> serious injuries than pedestrians /does/ prove something.
>
> What? What has that to do with whether a helmet provides a degree of
> protection. You're all at sixes and sevens here.
>
>>
>>> Ridiculous. There are loads of situations where one is forced, on a
>>> bike, into dangerous riding positions
>>
>> Again, the extent to which you appear to think cycling places you in
>> especially risky and dangerous situations suggests you are doing
>> something wrong. If that were not the case then the rates of serious
>> accidents amongst all cyclists would be much higher.
>
> You have no space in your small world for unexpected, unplanned for
> incidents. I am a cyclist. I do not wear a helmet. Things have happened
> to me that I could not plan for.
>
>>
>>> Yes you have outlined this : its total rubbish. There is already
>>> evidence
>>> that helmets have saved lives.
>>
>> So why haven't deaths and serious injuries been reduced overall in any
>> populations where helmets have been enthusiastically adopted? Why did
>> the expert witnesses in the quote above state what they stated?
>
> Expert witnesses probably never see those that dont appear on their
> radars : thats why. Again : yes or no. Do *you* think a helmet provides
> more protection than not wearing one. It really IS that simple.
>
>>
>>> I have said though that a helmet does indeed add protection for
>>> many many types of accident : the types of which you seem intent on
>>> blaming on the rider (as if this "cause" has any impact whatsoever on
>>> the actual discussion of whether a helmet is beneficial).
>>
>> Whatever the cause, the "eminent neurosurgeons acting for either side,
>> and the technical expert" from the quote by the expert witness above
>> doesn't agree with what you regard as a certainty.
>
> At the brain surgery level. You are moving the goalposts again.
>
>>
>>> What are you taking about? Why do you keep trying to deflect this from
>>> cycling : I do not wish to discuss helmets for caving and juggling and
>>> walking etc ...
>>
>> Safety equipment is to mitigate risk. It isn't to mitigate risk
>> /only/ if you happen to be cycling. If you wish to mitigate it
>
> err, we know. I have said this a thousand times. Are you really not
> understanding this? It is only you who keeps talking about "other than
> cycling" : I wish to keep it on track - hence my juggling dig.
>
>> cycling then that would be because of a certain level of risk. To
>> bother doing something about risk when cycling but nothing when you
>> engage in another /equally risky/ activity is ridiculous.
>>
>> [what's so risky about juggling?]
>>> Think about it.
>>
>> Yes, done that, can't really come up with an answer. Juggling sets
>> are available at Toys R Us. I don't seem to remember any set I've
>> seen carrying a safety warning.
>
> An pint with you must be a riot.
Do not waste much breath on this English-Scottish numskull. Note his
signature:
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
Surely, that ought to tell you everything you will ever need to know about
him.
He should get himself a nice modest humble signature like mine.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
news:[email protected]...
> Peter Clinch <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Hadron Quark wrote:
>>
>>> Who said anything about *whether* you should wear a helmet? I already
>>> said I dont. This discussion is about whether a helmet provides
>>> protection.
>>
>> I've already quoted a rather relevant piece but you seem to have
>> ignored it so here it is again:
>>
>> "the very eminent QC under whose instruction I was privileged to work,
>> tried repeatedly to persuade the equally eminent neurosurgeons acting
>> for either side, and the technical expert, to state that one must be
>> safer wearing a helmet than without. All three refused to so do,
>> stating that they had seen severe brain damage and fatal injury both
>> with and without cycle helmets being worn. In their view, the
>> performance of cycle helmets is much too complex a subject for such a
>> sweeping claim to be made."
>>
>> That from Brian Walker, boss of Head Protection Evaluation, who are
>> responsible for testing cycle helmets conform to the relevant
>> standards in the UK.
>
> Did you read it? How do you equate that rather fluffy statement with
> whether a helment provides a degree of protection or not?
>
>>
>>> You seem to be unable to extrapolate any siutation : its a strange logic
>>> you have. You are either infallible or have never ridden in poor weather
>>> in fast moving commuting traffic where all sorts of situations rears
>>> their
>>> ugly head.
>>
>> On the contrary, I (along with millions of others) do it regularly,
>> and do it safely as well. I can dream up loads of situations where
>> I'd end up dead or injured, but that doesn't prove anything. OTOH,
>
> ??? eh ???? Of course it doesnt : but its you who mentioned it. So why?
> To deflect the thread again thats why.
>
>> the way that millions cycle safely and don't produce worse rates of
>> serious injuries than pedestrians /does/ prove something.
>
> What? What has that to do with whether a helmet provides a degree of
> protection. You're all at sixes and sevens here.
>
>>
>>> Ridiculous. There are loads of situations where one is forced, on a
>>> bike, into dangerous riding positions
>>
>> Again, the extent to which you appear to think cycling places you in
>> especially risky and dangerous situations suggests you are doing
>> something wrong. If that were not the case then the rates of serious
>> accidents amongst all cyclists would be much higher.
>
> You have no space in your small world for unexpected, unplanned for
> incidents. I am a cyclist. I do not wear a helmet. Things have happened
> to me that I could not plan for.
>
>>
>>> Yes you have outlined this : its total rubbish. There is already
>>> evidence
>>> that helmets have saved lives.
>>
>> So why haven't deaths and serious injuries been reduced overall in any
>> populations where helmets have been enthusiastically adopted? Why did
>> the expert witnesses in the quote above state what they stated?
>
> Expert witnesses probably never see those that dont appear on their
> radars : thats why. Again : yes or no. Do *you* think a helmet provides
> more protection than not wearing one. It really IS that simple.
>
>>
>>> I have said though that a helmet does indeed add protection for
>>> many many types of accident : the types of which you seem intent on
>>> blaming on the rider (as if this "cause" has any impact whatsoever on
>>> the actual discussion of whether a helmet is beneficial).
>>
>> Whatever the cause, the "eminent neurosurgeons acting for either side,
>> and the technical expert" from the quote by the expert witness above
>> doesn't agree with what you regard as a certainty.
>
> At the brain surgery level. You are moving the goalposts again.
>
>>
>>> What are you taking about? Why do you keep trying to deflect this from
>>> cycling : I do not wish to discuss helmets for caving and juggling and
>>> walking etc ...
>>
>> Safety equipment is to mitigate risk. It isn't to mitigate risk
>> /only/ if you happen to be cycling. If you wish to mitigate it
>
> err, we know. I have said this a thousand times. Are you really not
> understanding this? It is only you who keeps talking about "other than
> cycling" : I wish to keep it on track - hence my juggling dig.
>
>> cycling then that would be because of a certain level of risk. To
>> bother doing something about risk when cycling but nothing when you
>> engage in another /equally risky/ activity is ridiculous.
>>
>> [what's so risky about juggling?]
>>> Think about it.
>>
>> Yes, done that, can't really come up with an answer. Juggling sets
>> are available at Toys R Us. I don't seem to remember any set I've
>> seen carrying a safety warning.
>
> An pint with you must be a riot.
Do not waste much breath on this English-Scottish numskull. Note his
signature:
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
Surely, that ought to tell you everything you will ever need to know about
him.
He should get himself a nice modest humble signature like mine.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota